Self defense, not mass hysteria

[A-R]

Continuing to pester all 17 Senators not listed as co-sponsors of SB 354 campus carry bill with daily faxes. Tonight I responded directly to all of the bullet points put forth by Students for Gun Free Schools in a fax I plan to send tomorrow. The lunacy and desperation of SGFS's arguments is akin to hysteria, which inspired me to come up with this pithy slogan that also subtly helps downplay the ridiculous notion that the only reason for campus carry is counter a Virginia Tech type of massacre.

SB 354: Self defense, not mass hysteria

What do y'all think?

[Hoi Polloi]

SB 354: Self defense, not mass hysteria

What do y'all think?

[E.Marquez]

Looks good.. Please share you response (fax) so others may use it as a base and send their own response quickly.

[chasfm11]

Looks good.. Please share you response (fax) so others may use it as a base and send their own response quickly.

[A-R]

I have a bunch of them, so here goes ...

April 15, 2011

To: The Honorable Senator John Whitmire, Texas Senate District 15

Senator Whitmire,

I wanted to share with you a letter sent this morning by Scott Lewis, Texas Legislative Director of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, to all members. In it he gives kudos to you for your principled stand on Wednesday, refusing to change your vote for a few hours so two of your Democratic colleagues could leave the Senate to attend an event in San Antonio.

I too wish to thank you for holding firm on this issue, and for the support you’ve shown to SB 354 despite not being one of the 14 co-sponsors. As this mini drama unfolded at the Capitol, I read your statements on a news web site and immediately praised your stand to other supporters of this legislation.

Your decisions on this issue will be remembered by all gun rights supporters in Texas. And I hope we can continue to count on your support for SB 354.

Thank you for your time and your service to this great state.

Scott Lewis5:25am Apr 15th
Subject: "The Tale of the Very Principled Senator"
Dear SCCC Members:

While we wait for Senate Bill 354 to receive a vote in the Senate, I’d like to share with you a story. It’s a story I’m calling “The Tale of the Very Principled Senator.”

-----

THE TALE OF THE VERY PRINCIPLED SENATOR

Once upon a time, there was a very important bill pending before the Texas Senate. It had majority support, but a few angry Senators were using parliamentary procedure to tie it up for as long as possible.

One bright, sunny Wednesday in the middle of April, two of those angry Senators wanted to travel to their hometown of San Antonio to welcome First Lady Michelle Obama for a visit. But they had a dilemma.

If the two angry Senators left the floor of the Senate before the Senate adjourned for the day, the author of the very important bill would need only 20 votes, instead of 21, to get it heard.

So, the two angry Senators approached their good friend (and fellow Democrat) the very principled Senator and asked for his help. They asked if he, a supporter of the very important bill, would change his vote for the day so that they could leave without worrying that the Senate would vote on the very important bill in their absence.

“I’m not going to do that,” said the very principled Senator. “I’m not going to flip-flop around here like that. This isn’t a carnival. This is the Texas Senate.”

The two angry Senators were quite dismayed that they couldn’t travel to San Antonio to meet the First Lady. And they suddenly realized that there would be repercussions to opposing the very important bill.

THE END

-----

In case you didn’t already know, the very principled Senator in that story is our good friend Senator John Whitmire (D-Houston). He refused to change his vote (even for a few hours) to accommodate two Senators who wanted to take the day off to attend a function with the First Lady.

Senator Whitmire stood by our side despite intense pressure from fellow party members. That’s a difficult decision to make, and Senator Whitmire is definitely the type of friend our movement needs.

We all need to reach out to Senator Whitmire (512-463-0115) and thank him for standing by both his principles and our cause. Devotion like that shouldn’t go unrecognized.

Sincerely,

W. Scott Lewis
Texas Legislative Director, Students for Concealed Carry on Campus

[A-R]

DEBUNKING THE MYTHS OF CAMPUS CARRY OPPONENTS

5 points from the web site of Students for Gun-Free Schools

(1) Concealed handguns would detract from a healthy learning environment.How? Concealed means concealed, how would anyone even know there was a gun in class? How does anyone know there is not already a gun in class (off-duty police officers and criminals already carry concealed guns wherever they want)? For many students, having the added protection of a concealed handgun while walking from a night class to a remote parking lot is very reassuring, reducing student stress and allowing the student to focus on learning.

(2) More guns on campus would create additional risk for students.What additional risks? A concealed handgun sitting in a holster cannot spontaneously leap out of the holster and start shooting people indiscriminately. And CHL holders are more than seven times less likely to commit violent crimes than the general population of Texas. Where is the additional risk?

(3) Shooters will not be deterred by concealed carry permit holders.
Maybe, maybe not. But mass murderers can and have been stopped by civilians with firearms.
Three citations:
• In 1997, the assistant principal of a high school in Pearl, Mississippi used his personal handgun that he kept in his car to stop a student killer. The assistant principal never fired a shot. The mere presence of his gun caused the student to surrender.
• In 2002, two students with firearms stopped another student who had already shot three people at a law school in Virginia. These brave young men also did not fire a shot – the murderer just surrendered.
• In 2005, Mark Allen Wilson bravely entered the courthouse square in Tyler, Texas, and exchanged gunfire with a madman who had already shot his own wife and son and was wildly spraying the courthouse with bullets from a semi-automatic rifle. Mr. Wilson was killed, but his actions forced the madman to retreat and flee the scene (he was later killed by police). For his heroic actions, he was honored with Texas House Resolution 740 on March 31, 2005.

Furthermore, CHL is not about stopping mass murderers. It is about self defense and personal security against violent criminals. CHL holders are not campus-wide SWAT teams ready for action. They are normal people interested in defending their own lives and the lives of their loved ones.

(4) Concealed carry permit holders are not always “law-abiding” citizens.
No group is “always” law-abiding. But after more than 15 years of CHL in Texas, the crime rate amongst CHL holders is exponentially lower than the general population – more than seven times fewer violent crimes committed by CHL holders than the general population.

CHL holders are fingerprinted, photographed, and their backgrounds are checked and verified by both the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Federal Bureau of Investigations. How many other students or professors are so thoroughly screened before being admitted to campus?

(5) Concealed carry permit holders are not required to have any law enforcement training.
Because CHL holders ARE NOT POLICE OFFICERS. Police officers are trained to make arrests, enter dangerous situations when others will flee, patrol areas seeking out crime, etc. Police officers are true heroes. CHL holders are average citizens who take their self defense seriously, but they are not police officers and they do not have the duties nor the authority of police officers.

CHL holders in Texas are thoroughly trained in de-escalation and non-violent conflict resolution techniques, justified use of force and deadly force for self defense, and required to pass a live-fire shooting test and a written test on applicable laws.

Furthermore, many CHL holders are gun enthusiasts who enjoy regularly practicing at shooting ranges and participating in shooting competitions. Many practice more often and are more proficient with their handguns than local police officers and much more so than the average armed security guard.

SGFS is an organization dedicated to keeping students safe proactively

We believe in accessible mental health resources for all community members.

We believe in proactive measures, not reaction to rare acts of terror.

We believe in engaged university administrators and student leaders.

CHL holders agree with implementing these same measures, but disagree that doing so must be mutually exclusive from also allowing CHL on campus. All of these measures should be pursued to ensure the highest possible level of safety and security on college campuses.

Allowing campus carry will increase universities’ insurance rates
This is a bogus argument, only recently made by those who are adamantly opposed to campus carry. Municipal and county government insurance rates did not increase when local government institutions lost the authority to ban CHL from their public buildings in 2005.





Senator,

Vote FOR SB 354
Self defense, not mass hysteria

[A-R]

DEBUNKING THE MYTHS OF SENATOR ELLIS

From the March 31, 2011, statement of Senator Rodney Ellis on SB 354

(AUSTIN)—"This bill will do nothing to improve the safety of students on campus and could, in fact, make dangerous situations that much more deadly by creating confusion for law enforcement. We don't need to incentivize campus Rambos.

This bill will allow students (and others) on Texas college campuses a last-resort personal defense against violent attack. This bill is about SELF defense when all other security measures have failed. This bill is about escaping that confrontation with a determined attacker, after a night class, in a remote and dark part of campus. This bill does not “incentivize” anything – it returns a right of self defense by any reasonable means to licensed, law-abiding adults on college campuses. If anything it de-incentivizes criminals.

"When there is an alcohol-related tragedy on campus, you don't hear claims that giving students more beer is the solution. Yet, when it comes to gun-related incidents, we seem to think that putting more guns in the mix will lead to a good, rather than bloody outcome.

This honestly must be the stupidest analogy I’ve heard yet in this debate. You don’t throw beer at a drunk to make him stop drinking. But shooting a bullet at a rapist/murderer before he gets his hands on you is a GOOD and BLOODY outcome. No one relishes the idea of severely injuring or killing another person, but in the gravest extreme circumstances when someone is threatened with imminent death or serious bodily injury, most of us would rather the criminal, and not the innocent victim, be harmed.

Opposition to SB 354 endorses the legislative theory that a woman found dead in a college building, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to campus police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound

"As it is today, campus law enforcement knows that if they see someone on campus with a gun, that person is violating the law and needs to be treated as a suspect. Under SB 354, we are going to make it much more difficult for law enforcement to know who the bad actors are.

This argument is insulting to brave campus police officers all over this state. Law enforcement personnel throughout this state deal with people legally and illegally carrying guns on a daily basis. Distinguishing between the two has never been a problem in more than 15 years since the CHL law was passed. Why does Senator Ellis believe campus police officers are so inferior to their fellow peace officers?

"Senate Bill 354 is a bad solution to a serious problem. It makes us feel like we've gotten tough -- deputizing students -- but the fact is that the universities don't want it, the students don't want it and law enforcement doesn't want it because they know it will not make our campuses safer.

SB 354 does not “deputize students”. It allows licensed, law-abiding adults to carry handguns for personal protection in campus buildings. That’s it.

"If we are going to go down this road of more guns on campus, then we need to allow the students on a campus to make the choice for themselves. Students must approve fee increases for a student center or gym, so we ought to let them approve whether they want their fellow students to be strapped in Econ 101. As of now, under this bill, private colleges are allowed to opt-out, yet students at public schools do not have the same right of refusal.

Students have limited collective power to decide localized issues like how their fees are spent. They don’t get to decide matters of statewide importance any more than a taxpayer gets to decide whether to allow wheelchair access at the county tax office.

No government institution subordinate to the state of Texas has any local control over the carrying of firearms in this state. And numerous other state laws mandate countless rules and regulations that Texas universities must follow. Universities and colleges deserve no more control over this issue than city councils and county commissioners. What’s next, will colleges want to revisit local control over admitting minority students and accommodating handicapped persons?

"If Baylor or Rice can opt-out and say 'no guns on campus' then the students at UT, A&M, UH and other public colleges must have that same right."

Baylor and Rice universities are private entities and as with all private entities in this state, have the right to make their own rules in their own premises. But UT, A&M, UH and other public universities are public institutions governed by the people for the people. Like public libraries, county tax offices, and even the State Capitol, these public institutions must heed the wishes of ALL Texans, not just the few who frequent their premises. Public universities are not fiefdoms of their chancellors any more than the State Capitol is subject to the whims of the governor.


Senator,

Vote FOR SB 354
Self defense, not mass hysteria

[A-R]

Opposition to SB 354 endorses the legislative theory that a woman found dead in a college building, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to campus police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound

Leaving our wives and daughters defenseless on campus is shameful and morally bankrupt.

Do what is right.
Support SB 354
Self defense, not mass hysteria

[A-R]

But if you really want good fact sheets to send to senators, check out Scott Lewis work here:

http://www.campuscarry.com/pdf/the_case ... _texas.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[J.R.@A&M]

I have a bunch of them, so here goes ...

Very well written counter-arguments. Wow!

[74novaman]

I have a bunch of them, so here goes ...

Very well written counter-arguments. Wow!

All great points.

And I think we do tend to get stuck on the worst case scenario, VT type situations. What CHL on campus will really help is decrease the likely hood of a woman attending a late night class being raped in the parking garage, the guy getting mugged by 2 or 3 other guys, etc.

This isn't about "campus" safety (Sen Ogden, you listening?) It's about an individuals right to secure their own safety.

[aggiedev]

This isn't about "campus" safety (Sen Ogden, you listening?) It's about an individuals right to secure their own safety.

No, he isn't. I've sent him all kinds of stuff, and all he sent back was a simple generic postcard that says he's busy.

[A-R]

This isn't about "campus" safety (Sen Ogden, you listening?) It's about an individuals right to secure their own safety.

No, he isn't. I've sent him all kinds of stuff, and all he sent back was a simple generic postcard that says he's busy.

yep, I got the same thing. And next election I'll reply to his postcard with a simple vote for the other guy.

[74novaman]

I've said it before, but my dislike first started to grow for this guy when he showed up to a Tea Party event in Brazos county and started talking about abortion and prayer in schools. Kinda missing the point there, isn't he?

The man needs to retire.

[Shoot Straight]

Ogden and any other senators aiding criminals on campus deserve a big fat F from the NRA.